Islam and Christianity are the two largest
and most missionary-minded religions in the world. Their beliefs are very
similar in many areas. They are both monotheistic, were founded by a specific
individual in a definite, historically verifiable setting, are universal, and
believe in the existence of angels, heaven and hell, a future resurrection, and
that God has made Himself known to man via a revelation.

However,
there also are many obvious differences between them, particularly in relation
to the person of Jesus Christ, the way of salvation, and each faith's scripture
or scriptures. These differences encompass the very foundational tenets of each
religion, and therefore, while Islam and Christianity can both be false, they
both cannot be true.

Our task is to examine each religion's
apologetic, or defense of their faith, to see if the claims of either religion
are verifiable. Particular attention will be paid to the founder and the
scripture or scriptures of each faith. The reason for this should be
self-evident: it is very easy for someone to make claims regarding himself,
proving them is an entirely different matter.

ISLAMIC
APOLOGETICS

Islam, like Christianity, believes that a person's
faith must be reasonable as well as subjective, that we must worship God with
our minds as well as our hearts. in sharing this common ground with Muslims let
us then examine why they believe what they believe.

The Miracle of
the Qur'an  The Islamic Claim

We must start our study of
Islamic apologetics by examining their highest source of authority, the Qur'an.
For Muslims, this is the pure word of God with no admixture of human thought or
content. indeed, many Muslims have such an intense jealousy for the Qur'an that
they keenly resent its being possessed by a non-Muslim.

The word
"Qur'an" comes from "an Arabic word meaning 'reading' or 'that which is to be
read.'" 1 Muslims affirm that the Qur'an was given
to Muhammad in the Arabic language, piece by piece, over a span of 23 years
until his death (Qur'an 43:3; 44:58; 17:106). Muslim apologetics for the Qur'an
cover four main areas: its preservation, eloquence, alleged prophecies, and
compatibility with modem science.

1. Preservation of the
Qur'an

Concerning the present authenticity of the Qur'an, Maulvi
Muhammad Ali makes the following grandiose statement:

As regards the authenticity of the Holy
Qur'an, I need not detain the reader very long. From one end of the world to
the other, from China in the Far East to Morocco and Algeria in the Far West.
from the scattered islands of the Pacific ocean to the great desert of Africa,
the Qur'an is one, and no copy differing in even a diacritical point is met
with in the possession of one among the four hundred millions of Muslims.2 There are, and always have been. contending sects,
but the same Qur'an is in the possession of one and all.... A manuscript with
the slightest variation in the text is unknown. 3

Thus Muslims not only believe that the
Qur'an is God's word in toto, they, also are confident that no error,
alteration, or variation has touched it since its inception. This, then, is one
of their "proofs" that the Qur'an is a "miracle" from God.

2.
Eloquence of the Qur'an

A second claim made to prove the
supernatural origin of the Qur'an, found in surah (chapter) 17:88, is
that its beauty and eloquence is self sufficient proof that the author is
God:

Say: "If the whole Of mankind and
Jinns Were to gather together To produce the like Of this Qur'an,
they Could not produce The like thereof, even if They backed up
each other With help and support."

In a footnote within his translation of the
Qur'an, Yusuf Ali states, "No human composition could contain the beauty,
power, and spiritual insight of the Qur'an. 4

However, Muslims do not believe that the Qur'an is a miracle solely
because of its eloquence and beauty, but also because in surah 7:157 Muhammad
is referred to as "The unlettered Prophet." Believing that he was illiterate,
they ask how such a man could produce the Qur'an.

A final claim
concerning the Qur'an's literary achievement is that it is so consistent
throughout that no human could have devised it. Suzanne Haneef asks "how the
whole Qur'an could be so utterly consistent" if it did not originate from God.
5

3. Prophecies in the Qur'an

The Qur'an speaks prophetically very little, if indeed it does prophesy at
all. Hence, few Muslim apologists use "fulfilled prophecy," as a proof for
their faith. However, there is a series of verses in the Qur'an which promise
that the Muslims will be victorious, both at home and abroad. 6 Maulana Muhammad Ali discusses these prophecies at
length in his work The Religion of Islam:

... we find prophecy after prophecy
announced in the surest and most certain terms to the effect that the great
forces of opposition should be brought to naught... that Islam should spread to
the farthest corners of the earth and that it should ultimately be triumphant
over all religions of the world. 7

4. Science and the Qur'an

Finally, there is one recent work, written by a French surgeon named Maurice
Bucaille. that attempts to vindicate the divine origin of the Qur'an by showing
its supposedly remarkable affinity with modern science. After citing a number
of examples, Dr. Bucaille concludes that:

... it is inconceivable for a human being
living in the seventh century to have made statements in the Qur'an on a great
variety of subjects that do not belong to his period and for them to be in
keeping with what was to be known only centuries later. For me, there can be no
human explanation to the Qur'an. 8

The "Miracle" of the Qur'an 
The Christian Response

1. Preservation of the Qur'an?

Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, in The Meaning of the Glorious Koran,
tells us that at the time of Muhammad's death the surahs (or chapters) of
the Qur'an had not yet been collated. This was accomplished during the
Caliphate of Abu Bakr. 9

The second
Caliph. Omar, "subsequently made a single volume (mushaf) that he
preserved and gave on his death to his daughter Hafsa, the Prophet's widow."
10 Finally, under the Caliphate of Uthman all
copies of the Qur'an were ordered to be brought in and any that deviated from
Uthman's text were burned.

We have no quarrel with the Islamic
position that since the Recension of Uthman the Qur'an has remained intact.
However, because of the destruction of all deviant copies no one can know with
any certainly if the present Qur'an is exactly the same as what Muhammad gave
them.

Islam teaches that the only reason Uthman had all the other
collections of the Qur'an burned-except his was that there were slight
dialectical variations in the different texts. However, there is some evidence
which tends to refute this. First of all, it is very significant that the
Qurra, the Muslims who had memorized the entire Qur'an, were vehemently opposed
to the Recension. And second, the Shi'ites, who are the second largest Islamic
sect in the world, claim that the Caliph Uthman intentionally eliminated many
passages from the Qur'an which related to Ali and the succession of leadership
which was to occur after Muhammad's death.

Bevan Jones, in his work
The People of the Mosque, succinctly answers the Muslim argument for the
alleged miraculous preservation of the Qur'an: "But while it may be true that
no other work has remained for twelve centuries with so pure a text, it is
probably equally true that no other has suffered so drastic a purging."
11

2. Eloquence of the Qur'an?

Concerning the Qur'an's beauty style, and eloquence, any unbiased reader
would have to admit that this is certainly true of much of the Qur'an. However,
eloquence itself is hardly a logical test for inspiration. If this were the
criteria used to judge a work, then we would have to say that the authors of
many of the great works of antiquity were inspired by God. Homer would have to
have been a prophet for producing the magnificent Iliad and the
Odyssey. In the English Language Shakespeare is without a peer as a
dramatist, but it would be ludicrous to say that because of this his tragedies
were of divine origin. Likewise for the eloquence of the Qur'an.

But
what about the consistency of the Qur'an can it be used to show that this
Muslim scripture was inspired? To begin with, it can be shown that the Qur'an
is not totally consistent, but rather has some major contradictions in it.
12 Even if we granted the thesis that the Qur'an
was totally consistent this still would not prove anything. In an essay
entitled "How Muslims Do Apologetics," Dr. John Warwick Montgomery demonstrates
this for us:

This apologetic is likewise of little
consequence, for the self-consistency of a writing does not prove that it is a
divine revelation. Euclid's Geometry, for example, is not self-contradictory at
any point but no one claims that this work is therefore divinely inspired in
some unique sense. 13

And finally, what about Muhammad's alleged
illiteracy? First of all, there is a good deal of evidence against it. But even
if we granted the fact that Muhammad could not read or write this still would
not make the Qur'an miraculous. Why?

Because all Muslims know that he
had at least several amanuenses or scribes: and therefore, he could easily have
composed the Qur'an in this fashion. This would not be unique, as there are
precedents for this. One that most people will be familiar with concerns Homer.
He was blind and thus, in all likelihood, could not write. Yet he was the
author of the Iliad and the 0dyssey, the two greatest epics of
the ancient world. In like fashion the question of whether or not Muhammad was
illiterate really has no bearing on the case in question.

3.
Prophecies in the Qur'an?

Can we say that Islam's vast expansion,
predicted by Muhammad. is a fulfillment of prophecy? If we think this through
for just a moment. I believe we can easily answer no.

To begin with, a
leader promising his troops or followers a victory is not the least bit unique.
Every commander or general does this in order to inspire his army and build up
their morale. If they are then victorious, he is vindicated if they lose then
we never hear of his promises because they, along with his movement, are
forgotten.

Also, the Muslim had several important incentives to
consider while fighting to further the cause of Islam. If he died, he was
promised to be allowed into paradise. If he lived and they were victorious in
battle, the Muslim soldiers would divide up four-fifths of all the booty.

There is another reason why Islam initially expanded so rapidly. If we
look at some of the Qur'anic injunctions about what the non-believers could
expect at the hands of the Muslims, it is easy to understand why so many
"submitted," as found in surah 5:36: 14

The punishment of those Who wage war
against God And his Apostle, and strive With might and main For
mischief through the land Is: execution, or crucifixion. Or the cutting
off of hands And feet from opposite sides. Or exile from the
land.

The polytheists had two choices, submit or
die. The Christians and the Jews had a third alternative, paying heavy tribute
(Qur'an 9:5, 29).

A final point to be considered is that if the fast
and far reaching growth of a movement indicated divine favor, then what about
such conquerors as Genghis Khan? He consolidated the Mongol tribes and in a
time span shorter than early Islam's conquered a much larger geographic area.
Was his military success evidence that he was led of God? And what of Islam's
own growth which was stopped in the West by Charles Martel (AD. 732) and in the
East by Leo III (A.D. 740)? Does this mean that they lost favor with Allah?
What of the later history of many Islamic countries who suffered the indignity,
of becoming colonies of the then world powers? No, we can find nothing
mysterious or supernatural about Islam's amazing early growth or subsequent
fall.

4. Science and the Qur'an?

A very recent Islamic
polemic . The Bible, the Qur'an and Science by Dr. Maurice Bucaille,
attempts to demonstrate that the Qur'an must have been divinely inspired
because it allegedly states many things that were unknown in the seventh
century and have subsequently become known only in our twentieth century.

In answering Dr. Bucaille it must first be pointed out that the bulk of
the book does not deal with the Qur'an and science. Rather, most of it is an
attempt (using the techniques of higher criticism) to disgrace the Bible. The
portions of his book which do attempt to show that the Qur'an is in amazing
agreement with twentieth-century scientific knowledge are very vague.

However, what if we were to grant his thesis that the statements in the Qur'an
are in total agreement with modem science? Dr. Bucaille states that if this
were true, then "it is unthinkable that a man of Muhammad's time could have
been the author of them." 15 I agree with his
conclusion, assuming his thesis is true. If the Qur'an has detailed scientific
statements which we have only recently discovered to be true, and yet it was
written in the seventh century AD., then it could not have been merely the
product of Muhammad. But this does not identify the source of the information,
it only shows that no human being could have written it without superhuman
help.

If indeed the Qur'an had a supernatural origin, then we are
still left with the task of finding out who its source was. Dr. Bucaille
assumes that it must be God, but why? If we pause and think for just a
moment, we realize that there are other supernatural beings besides God. One of
these beings is referred to as Satan in the Bible, as well as in the Qur'an.
The Bible tells us that he has been on the earth as long as man has, that he
has powers and intelligence far superior to ours, and that he is "the father of
lies" (John 8:44).
To whisper some scientific facts into someone's ear would be no great feat for
him. As a matter of fact the Bible says that he does appear to men from time to
time: "For even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light" (2 Cor. 11:14). It is
interesting that this is exactly the initial fear that Muhammad had the first
time he heard the voice speak to him. 16

5. Sources of The Qur'an

In concluding this section on the
Qur'an the reader may be interested to know that many of the stories or
accounts found within the Qur'an are traceable to very similar (sometimes
almost identical) stories found in pre-Islamic writings. I would direct the
reader to Clair-Tisdall's classic The Sources of Islam, Rev W.
Goldsack's The Origins of the Qur'an, and Samuel M. Zwemer's Islam: A
Challenge to Faith.

Is Muhammad Prophesied in the
Bible?

Virtually every religion that began after Christianity
attempts to show that it is compatible with the Bible. They also endeavor,
usually quite laboriously, to show that their founder or faith is referred to
in the Bible. 17 Thus it comes as no surprise to
find that Muslims also claim that their was prophesied in both the Old and New
Testaments.

Our question still needs to be answered: Although Islam is
not unique in claiming to be verified by the Bible, might not its claims be
nonetheless true? There are some minor, less detailed verses which Muslim claim
are "prophecies" related to Muhammad. However, the verses which most Muslims
cite as the most explicative are Deuteronomy 18:15-18 and
John 14:16;
15:26; and
16:7.

1. Deuteronomy 18:15-18

The Lord your God will raise up for you a
Prophet like me from your midst from your brethren. Him you shall hear,

According to all you desired of the Lord your God in Horeb in the day of
the assembly, saying, "Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God, nor
let me see this great fire anymore, lest I die."

And the Lord said to
me: "What they have spoken is good.

I will raise up for dm a Prophet
like you from among their brethren, and will put My words in His mouth. and He
shall speak to them all that I command Him."

This is universally held by Muslims as a
prophesy pertaining to Muhammad. 18 There are a
number of reasons why they believe it cannot be referring to Jesus.

First, the Promised Prophet was to be a
law giving Prophet.... Jesus laid no claim to giving a new law.... Secondly,
the Promised Prophet was to be raised not from among Israel but from among
their brethren and Jesus was an Israelite.... Thirdly, the prophecy was: "I
will put my words in his mouth." But the gospels do not consist of words which
God put in Jesus' mouth. They only tell us the story of Jesus and what he said
in some of his public addresses and what his disciples said or did on different
occasions. Fourthly, the Promised One was to be a Prophet, while the Christian
view is that Jesus was not a Prophet but the son of God. 19

The Muslim will then point out the many ways
in which Muhammad and Moses were alike. Each appeared among idolaters. They
were both law givers who were initially rejected by their people and had to
flee into exile, only to return later to lead their nations. They both married
and had children, and were military leaders as well as spiritual leaders. After
both of their deaths their successors conquered Palestine.

The Muslim
conclusion is that this prophecy. Before we continue any farther, let us first
analyze these points. The first objection raised against this prophecy having
been fulfilled in Jesus was that Jesus was not a lawgiver. Muslims who claim
this only show their own lack of understanding of the New Testament as shown in
John 13:34 and Galatians 6:2:

A new commandment I give you, that you
love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love another.

Bear one another's burdens, and thus fulfill the law of Christ.

The next objection to this prophecy having
been fulfilled in Jesus was that "brethren" must refer to the Ishmaelites, not
to the Israelites themselves. This argument can easily be refuted by simply
looking at how the term "brethren" is used in the Bible. One cogent example is
found in Deuteronomy 17:15: Moses instructs the Israelites: "You shall surely
set a king over you whom the Lord your God chooses; one from among your
brethren you shall set as king over you; you may not set a foreigner over you,
who is not your brother."

Now, did Israel ever appoint a foreigner as
king over them? More specifically, was an Ishmaelite ever appointed king over
Israel? Of course not. To choose a king "from among your brethren" refers to
choosing someone from one of the 12 tribes of Israel. Likewise, the prophet
spoken of in Deuteronomy 18 was to be an Israelite.

Another objection to Deuteronomy 18:15-18 being fulfilled in
Jesus is that the Gospels allegedly do not consist of words which God gave
Jesus, vitally important in light of verse 18. However, to say that Jesus did
not speak what God the Father gave Him again betrays an abysmal ignorance of
the New Testament: "For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father
who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak" (John
12:49). 21

The final objection raised
against Jesus' fulfilling these verses is that Christians supposedly only view
Jesus as the Son of God, not as a prophet. Once again we see that the Muslim
too often has little familiarity with the New Testament. Jesus Himself,
prophesying His impending death, said that He must continue His journey to
Jerusalem "for it cannot be that a prophet should perish outside of Jerusalem"
(Luke 13:33). 22

The Muslim will point
out that I still have not explained the many similarities between Moses and
Muhammad. It is true that they have many correspondences, but there are also
many differences. For example, if Muhammad was illiterate as virtually all
Muslims assume then he was not like Moses who "was learned in all the wisdom of
the Egyptians" (Acts
7:22). Muhammad is said to have received his revelations from the angel
Gabriel, while Moses received the Law directly from God. Muhammad performed no
signs or miracles to verify his calling, yet Moses performed many signs. Also,
Muhammad was Arabic, while Moses was of Jewish origin.

If one we to
peruse the Gospels, he would see that although Jesus was unlike Moses in some
ways, in other ways He was very much like him. They were both Jewish, which is
very important in light of what we have learned about the term "your brethren."
They both left Egypt to minister to their people (Heb. 11:27;
Mat. 2:15). Both
also forsook great riches in order to better identify with their people (Heb.11:24-26;
John 6:15;
2 Cor. 8:9).

So we see that both Jesus and Muhammad had similarities with Moses. In
what special way then was this coming prophet to be "like unto Moses"? The
answer is found in Deuteronomy 34:8-10 where two distinguishing characteristics
of Moses are listed:

But since then there has not arisen in
Israel a prophet like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face.

In all
the signs and wonders which the Lord sent him to do in the land of Egypt before
Pharaoh, before all his servants, and in all his land.

And by all that
mighty power and all the great terror Arch Moses performed in the sight of all
Israel.

This is a direct reference to Deuteronomy 18:15-18. Notice that two specific things are
mentioned about Moses here in referring back to the earlier prophecy. The first
is that the Lord knew Moses "face to face." 23
Muhammad never had this type of relationship with God; indeed, in Islam God is
so transcendent that except for the unique case of Moses He never spoke
directly with men.

Jesus, "the Word made flesh" (John 1:14), is only
one who ever had a relationship with God like Moses had. In fact, Jesus'
relationship far surpasses that of Moses: "In the beginning was the Word, and
the word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1).

The second
characteristic feature of Moses, that he came with many "signs" and ..
wonders," hardly needs to be expounded on. The many miracles that both Moses
and Jesus worked are well known. The Qur'an itself testifies that Muhammad
worked no miracles. 24

And finally,
Jesus Himself tells us who the prophet is that Deuteronomy
18:15-18 is prophesying: "For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me,
for he wrote about Me" (John 5:46). 25

Muslims claim that the verses speaking of the coming "Comforter" ("Paracletos"
in the original Greek) are actually references to the coming of Muhammad. The
reason for this is that in the Qur'an Jesus is made to say that after Himself
an apostle would be sent, "Whose name shall be Ahmad" (Qur'an 61:6). The
following is Yusuf Ali's commentary on this verse:

"Ahmad," or "Muhammad" the Praised
one, is almost a translation of the Greek word Periclytos in the present
Gospel of John, xiv. 16, xv. 26. and xvi. 7. the word "Comforter" in the
English version is for the Greek word "Paracletos" which means
"Advocate," "one called to the help of another, a kind friend," rather than
"Comforter." Our doctors contend that Paracletos is a corrupt reading for
Periclytos, and that in their [sic] original saving of Jesus there was a
prophecy of our holy Prophet Ahmad by name. 26

Thus Muslim believe that all of our Bibles
have been corrupted and that the apostle John really used the word "Periclytos"
in these verses, not the word "Paracletos".

In examining the Muslim
claim that the text has been corrupted the textual critic would quite rightly
took to the actual textual evidence. There are over 24,000 manuscript copies of
portions of the New Testament which date from before A.D. 350. Not once in any
of the manuscripts which contain these pages do we find the word "Periclytos"
used. The word that we find used every time is "Paracletos." Thus, there is
absolutely no textual evidence which would back up their contention that
the text was corrupted.

The Muslim position is even more lamentable
when we caref6ily read these verses to see what Jesus was saying. There is a
great deal which could be said about each verse; however, we will limit our
review to the obvious discrepancies between the Islamic position and what is
actually being said: "And I will pray the Father, and He will give you
another Cornforter, 27 that He may abide with you
forever" (John
14:16). First of all, Jesus said that the Father "will give you another
Comforter." Who was Jesus addressing in these verses? The Arabs, or more
specifically, the Ishmaelites? Of course not. He is speaking to Jewish
believers. Hence the "Comforter" would be sent initially to them. This cannot
be referring to Muhammad.

Second, this verse states that the
"Paracletos," the "Comforter," would "abide with You forever." How can this
apply to Muhammad? The Muslim prophet has been dead and buried for over 1,300
years.

"Even the Spirit of Truth, whom the world cannot receive,
because it neither sees Him not knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells in
you (John 14:17).
Here "the Spirit of the Truth" is used as another title or synonym for the
"Paraclete." We see from this verse that the "Paraclete" would be "in you."
Again, it is impossible to reconcile this statement with the Islamic
position.

John 14:26 completely devastates the Muslim hypothesis that
Muhammad was actually the one being prophesized in the verses dealing with the
coming of the "Comforter" (or "Paraclete"): "But the Comforter, the Holy
Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things,
and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you." Jesus commanded
His disciples -- in Acts 1:4-5 -- not to
"depart from Jerusalem," for they would "be baptized with the Holy Spirit
not many days from now."

Do these verses really apply to
Muhammad appearing 600 years later in Mecca? Only a person already biased and
completely credulous could believe this. The fulfillment of Jesus' words
occurred 10 days later on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1-4), not six
centuries later, hundreds of miles from Jerusalem.

Prof. 'Abdu 'L-Ahad
Dauud, in Muhammad inthe Bible, states that this alleged
prophecy "is one of the strongest proofs that Muhammad was truly a
Prophet and that the Qur'an is really a divine revelation." 28 (emphasis added). If these verses constitute one
of their "strongest proofs," then I will not belabor the reader with "lesser
proofs." I believe that Blaise Pascal succinctly summarized the situation: "Any
man can do what [Muhammad] has done; for he performed no miracles, he was not
foretold. No man can do what Christ has done." 29

CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS

In
the remaining space it will be impossible to give more than an overview of the
evidences for the Christian faith. 30 The two
areas we will examine are the evidences for the reliability of the Bible and
the person of Jesus Christ.

The Reliability of the Bible

For Muslims the Bible is virtually worthless as far as being an authentic
revelation from God. They believe it has been totally corrupted and is
therefore not trustworthy. However, if we examine the biblical documents, using
the same thorough standards any historiographer would use, we discover that its
reliability is unimpeachable.

The New Testament documents, for
example, have more manuscript authority than any 10 works of antiquity put
together. As mentioned earlier, we have over 24,000 manuscript copies of
portions of the New Testament dating from before A.D. 350. in comparison, the
number two book in all of ancient history for manuscript authority is the
Iliad with 643 manuscripts.

Dr. John Warwick Montgomery, dean
of the Simon Greenleaf School of Law and a noted theologian, comments on this:
"To be skeptical of the resultant text of the New Testament books is to allow
all of classical antiquity to slip into obscurity, for no documents of the
ancient period are as well attested bibliographically as the New Testament.
31

When we turn to the text of the New
Testament itself we see that the writers of the New Testament books claimed
that they were eyewitnesses, or close associates of eyewitnesses, of the events
they narrated. 32 We also have excellent external
evidence confirming this. Papias, a disciple of the apostle John, confirms the
fact that Mark did indeed write the Gospel which is ascribed to him, obtaining
his information from the apostle Peter. 33
Polycarp, another disciple of the apostle John, taught his own disciple
Irenaeus that the men to whom the four Gospel are ascribed were in truth their
real authors. 34

In addition to these
evidences we can also add the findings of modem archaeology. Time after time
archaeology has vindicated biblical accounts which had previously been
ridiculed as being grossly inaccurate. 35
Concerning this, Nelson Glueck, a world-famous Jewish archaeologist, went so
far as to say that "it may be stated categorically that no archaeological
discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference.36

In any responsible examination of the
biblical documents the evidence for their reliability comes out positive. Even
well-known secular historians accept the biblical accounts as being
historically reliable. A.N. Sherwin-White, a non-Christian, accepts without
question the essential reliability of the Gospels and the Book of Acts:

For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming... any attempt to
reject its historicity in matters of detail must now appear absurd. Roman
historians haw long taken it for granted. 37

It is very interesting to note that Yusuf Ali, in his widely used English
translation of the Qur'an, twice cites Sir Frederick Kenyon as a renowned
authority. 38 Kenyon, formerly the principal
curator of the British Museum, was one the world's greatest authorities on text
criticism of ancient works. Concerning the textual reliability of the Bible, he
concluded that "the Christian can take the whole Bible in his hand and say
without fear or hesitation that he holds in it the true Word of God.
39

The Death and Resurrection of
Christ

Muslims, denying that Jesus died on the cross, hold that no
resurrection occurred. They do this not on the basis of the historical evidence
but because the Qur'an simply denies that Jesus was crucified. 40 However, once again their beliefs fly in the face
of all the evidence.

If these events did not occur (Jesus' death and
resurrection), one is faced with tremendously difficult questions. what
accounts for the change in Peter, from being a coward who denied even knowing
Jesus, into being a martyr? What accounts for the change of Saul, the greatest
persecutor of the early church, into the apostle Paul, the greatest missionary
of the early church (who also suffered martyrdom)? What accounted for the birth
of the Christian church itself Christianity was not spread by force. The first
Christians had no worldly incentives to preach Jesus' death and resurrection.
Conversely, all they could expect were revilements, persecution, and martyrdom.
The only satisfactory answer to these questions is that Jesus did indeed rise
from the dead. just as He promised.

Near the end of the eighteenth
century La Revelliere-Lepeaux, a determined non-Christian, was attempting to
replace Christianity with neophilanthropy (a form of deism) as the religion of
France. When he told Talleyrand his plans, "the cynical politician replied,
'All you have to do is get yourself hanged, and revive the third day.'"
41

Indeed, Talleyrand very perceptively
showed the main difference between Christianity and every other religions of
the world. Jesus Christ raised Himself from the dead, thus verifying His claims
to deity. Muhammad and all of the other founders are still in the grave. Only
Jesus has the power of life over death, as He said in John 11:25-26:

I am the resurrection and the life, he who
believes in Me shall live even if He dies, and everyone who lives and believes
in me shall never die.

NOTES

1. Suzanne Haneef, What Everyone Should Know About Islam
and Muslims (Chicago: Karl Publications, 1979), p. 18.2. This was the approximate Islamic population when this
book was published in 1921. Today the Muslim population is estimated to be
between 800 million to one billion.3. Maulvi
Muhammad Al,. Muhammad and Christ (Lahore: India, The
Ahmadiyya-i-Ishaat-i-Islam, 1921). p. 7.4. Abdullah
Yusuf Ali, THE HOLY QUR'-AN: Text, Translation and Commentary, (Qatar:
Qatar National Printing Press, 1946). p. 401.5.
Haneef, op. cit., p. 30.6. Qur'an 3:12: 41:53;
14:13-14.7. Maulana Muhammad Ali, The Religion
of Islam (Pakistan: The Ahmadiyya-i-Ishaat-i-Islam, 1950), p. 249.8. Maurice Bucaille, The Bible, The Qur'an and
Science, trans. Alastair D. Pannell and Maurice Bucaille (Paris: North
America Trust Publication, 1978). p. 125.9.
Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall, The Meaning of the Glorious Koran (New
York: The New American Library, 1961), p. xxviii.10. Bucaille, op. cit., p. 130.11. L. Bevan Jones, The People of the Mosque
(London: Student Christian Movement Press, 1932). p. 62.12. Due to lack of space this argument cannot be pursued
here. The interested reader may write to the author in care of CRI for further
information on this.13. John Warwick Montgomery,
Faith Founded on Fact (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1978), p.
94.14. Also, cf. Qur'an 4:47.15. Bucaille, op. cit., p. 251.16. Pickthall, op. cit.. pp. x-xi.17. e.g. Mani, in the third century, claimed to be the
"Paraclete" or the "Comforter" spoken by Jesus by in John 141i6, 26. The
Baha'is, originating within Islam itself, likewise believe that their founder
Baha'u'llah was foretold in the Bible. And the Mormons believe that Ezekiel
prophesized the coming of one of their scriptures, The Book of Mormon.18. They also believe that the Qur'an refers to this in
surah 7:157.19. Hazrat Mirza Bashir-Ud-Din Mahmud
Ahmad, Introduction to the Study of the Holy Quran, (London: The London
Mosque, 1949). pp. 84-85. Also cf. Ulfat Aziz-Us-Samad, Islam and
Christianity, (Karachi, Pakistan: Begum Aisha Bauany Wakf., 1974). p.
96.20. Abdu 'L-Ahad Dauud, Muhammad in the
Bible (Kuala Lumpur, Pustaka Antara,1979), p. 2.21. Also cf. John 7:16, 8:28.22. Also cf. John 4:19; 6:14; 7:40; 9:17; Matt.21:11; Luke
7:16.23. cf. Exodus 33:11.24. cf. Qur'an 17:59; 17:90-93; 6:37; 6:109.25. Also cf. Luke 24:27.26. Abdullah Yusuf Ali, op. cit., p. 1540.27. The Greek word "Paracletos" may be translated as
"comforter," "counselor," "advocate," or "helper."28. Dauud, op. cit., p. 216.29. Blaise Pascal, Pensées, number 599.30. The interested reader might consult the following
works for a more in-depth understanding of Christian apologetics: John Warwick
Montgomery, History and Christianity, InterVarsity Press; and Faith
Founded on Fact, Thomas Nelson; Norman L Geisler and William E Nix. A
General Introduction to the Bible, Moody Press; Wilbur M. Smith,
Therefore Stand, Baker Book House; Josh McDowell, Evidence That
Demands a Verdict; Here's Life Publishers; and Don Stewart, The Bible,
Here's Life Publishers.31. John Warwick
Montgomery, History and Christianity, (Downers Grove, IL, InterVarsity
Press, 1976). p. 29.32. e.g., 2 Pet 1:16; Luke
1:1-2; Acts 4:19-20; 1 John 1:1, 3.33. Eusebius,
Ecclesiastical History III, 39.34. Irenaeus,
Against Heresies III, I.. I.35. e.g.,
William M. Ramsay, The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of
the New Testament, Baker Book House, and Was Christ Born at Bethlehem?,
Baker Book House; Kathleen M. Kenyon, Archeology in the Holy Land,
Thomas Nelson Publishers; and E.M. Blaiklock, The Archeology of the New
Testament, Thomas Nelson Publishers.36. Nelson
Glueck, Rivers in the Desert, (Philadelphia: Jewish Publications Society
of America, 1969), p. 31.37. A. N. Sherwin-White,
Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament, (reprint ed.; Grand
Rapids: MI Baker Book House, 1978), p. 189.38.
Abdullah Yusuf Ali, op. cit., pp. 285, 287.39.
Frederick G. Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, (New York:
Harper and Row, 1941), p. 23.40. cf. Qur'an 4:157,
158.41. Eric Foner, Tom Paine and Revolutionary
America, (New York Oxford University Press, 1976), p. 253.

Joseph P. Gudel was a researcher at the Christian Research
Institute when he wrote this article.

Used by permission of the
publisher, Christian Research Journal, Winter 1986, pp.
18-25.